199 réponses à ce sujet

[Funkdrspot]

[quote]iakus wrote...

1st, can the insults[/quote]

You got it.

[quote]iakus wrote...
2nd, the Catalyst is mentioning Shepard in the same breath as wiping out all synthetic life.  The veiled threat is there.  "If I die, so do you, along with your friend and allies".[/quote]
The problem with your interpretation is that the red EM blast is clearly stated by the Catalyst to kill off synthetic AI. An AI is not hardware, it is software that has an evolved conscious. [/quote]

Shepard has nothing in him that could be construed as being an AI. The fact is that he's a hybrid of parts and flesh is merely mentioned to possibly sway him emotionally.

[quote]iakus wrote...
3rd, yes people survive disasterous events like that.  But it's rare.  Otherwise such events wouldn't be noteworthy now, would they?[/quote]

True and not true. People survive these events almost every time there is one, it's just that disasters don't happen that often. That plus they don't have the tools as their disposal that Shep does. 

I just mention it b/c i'm tired of hearing how every improbable event that Shepard escapes is some massive use of a plothole/space magic/art/speculations

[quote]iakus wrote...
The problem isn't just that Shepard's circuits get fried, or might get fried, but that his organic bits have been pulverized as well.  Plus the Citadel itself took a beating.  There's no aid in sight.  The scene of Shepard breathing is supposed to elicit hope, but it's a tiny spark compared to the dark circumstances SHepard was currently in[/quote]

I truly believe that they will expand on it, either with DLC or with ME 4.

But here's the thing, you're looking at a dual plot device.

• The darker/deeper the circumstance, the more epic the journey back.
• It's the end of the Reaper's but is it REALLY the end of Shepard's story? I don't think so. I think the cliffhanger ending is that way to draw you back in for ME 4

[Funkdrspot]

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

Did you see how Legion showed the example of Geth vs Reaper 'intelligence'? Nowhere do you see any reall physical parts. What you see looks like a nerve cell.

What's the precise differences in the brain between an animal that acts on instinct and a self-aware human? 

[BABYRHINO97]

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

I think you're trying to get me to say programming, which is true. However, it seems like the programming that goes into a Geth or EDI is just the base, and true AI or synthetic life is when the robot takes that programming and uses it to became a real person. Of course, I don't know that because we don't have true AI in real life.

So yes, the machines in Shepard's body have programming, but in the same way that a computer or a toaster have programming, not life the Geth.

[Funkdrspot]

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

I think you're trying to get me to say programming, which is true. However, it seems like the programming that goes into a Geth or EDI is just the base, and true AI or synthetic life is when the robot takes that programming and uses it to became a real person. Of course, I don't know that because we don't have true AI in real life.

So yes, the machines in Shepard's body have programming, but in the same way that a computer or a toaster have programming, not life the Geth.

Self-awareness might be the word you were looking for.

[Goneaviking]

Funkdrspot wrote...
It's the end of the Reaper's but is it REALLY the end of Shepard's
story? I don't think so. I think the cliffhanger ending is that way to
draw you back in for ME 4

Darn strange way to lure players back for another instalment. By promising to invalidate three out of four possible endings...

[ShadowLordXII]

SPPAAACCCEEEE MAAGGGIIICCC!!!!!

[halbert986]

A legitimate question that I can't wait to see answered in the next chapter of Mass effect.

Personally I sway towards the dream side. I don't think shepard ever left earth after getting zapped by harbinger.

But it's clearly concrete and that's clearly a reaper tube wire thing. Plus the lighting is dark blue london reaper beam style. Not orange black death citadel style. It's not like every pixel in that shot wasn't intentional. Someone had to animate that scene, and they're not gonna tell the animators "make it look like earth but really it's the citadel." The animation in this game seemed almost budget-less in it's detail, I doubt they'd skimp on the cliffhanger ending.

[Dr JaMiN]

Shepard never left Earth. According to the Indoctrination Theory, everything that happens from the beam run to the breath scene is a reaper induced hallucination. Literalist or not, that is the only logical explanation for the end. The game isn't over yet, Shepard will draw another breath.

[Iakus]

[quote]Funkdrspot wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...
2nd, the Catalyst is mentioning Shepard in the same breath as wiping out all synthetic life.  The veiled threat is there.  "If I die, so do you, along with your friend and allies".[/quote]
The problem with your interpretation is that the red EM blast is clearly stated by the Catalyst to kill off synthetic AI. An AI is not hardware, it is software that has an evolved conscious. 

Shepard has nothing in him that could be construed as being an AI. The fact is that he's a hybrid of parts and flesh is merely mentioned to possibly sway him emotionally. [/quote]

The exact quote when mentioning Shepard's potential death:

"It is now in your power to destroy us.  But be warned: others will be destroyed as well.  the Crucible will not discriminate.  All synthetics will be targeted.  Even you are partly synthetic"

This doesn't strike me as a play for sympathy, but a warning that the Crucible's blast won't just take out the Reapers.  And even Shepard is at risk, for whatever reason (I assume it's not just because Shepard walked into the explosion like an idiot)


[quote]iakus wrote...
3rd, yes people survive disasterous events like that.  But it's rare.  Otherwise such events wouldn't be noteworthy now, would they?[/quote]

True and not true. People survive these events almost every time there is one, it's just that disasters don't happen that often. That plus they don't have the tools as their disposal that Shep does. 

I just mention it b/c i'm tired of hearing how every improbable event that Shepard escapes is some massive use of a plothole/space magic/art/speculations[/quote]

And when one survives when a hundred others do not, there's usually a reason, even if it's nothing more than a happy coincidence.  And when it does happen, people want to know the how and why.  
[quote]
[quote]iakus wrote...
The problem isn't just that Shepard's circuits get fried, or might get fried, but that his organic bits have been pulverized as well.  Plus the Citadel itself took a beating.  There's no aid in sight.  The scene of Shepard breathing is supposed to elicit hope, but it's a tiny spark compared to the dark circumstances SHepard was currently in[/quote]

I truly believe that they will expand on it, either with DLC or with ME 4.

But here's the thing, you're looking at a dual plot device.

• The darker/deeper the circumstance, the more epic the journey back.
• It's the end of the Reaper's but is it REALLY the end of Shepard's story? I don't think so. I think the cliffhanger ending is that way to draw you back in for ME 4

[/quote]
That's just it though, there is no journey back.  Bioware left that out completely.  Deliberately, it looks like.  Everything Bioware has said indicated that this is it.    Shepard's story officially ends on the Citadel, either as a crispy critter or buried in rubble. Anything else will be relegated to fanfiction and headcanon. There is no postgame DLC planned.
I don't even see how they can make an ME4 set after the war without establishing a canon.  And I have every confidence in that case that Shepard will canonically have died on the Citadel.
Shepard's breath scene is, to Bioware, meaningless.  Meant only to establish "hope" because all the outright deaths might be seen as too bleak.

They had a golden opportunity to expand on the scene in EC, and ignored it.  They bent over backwards to make Synthesis look good.  They explained what happens to Shepard's mind in Control.  They retconned the exploding relays.  But Shepard they left in rubble.  That should tell you how important Shepard's survival isn't to the "artistic vision"

[KyuzoS7]

if Edi and the Geth have to die for my shepard to live and be with tali.......

"Then So Be It!"..........

:3

[Pitznik]

iakus wrote...


The exact quote when mentioning Shepard's potential death:

"It is now in your power to destroy us.  But be warned: others will be destroyed as well.  the Crucible will not discriminate.  All synthetics will be targeted.  Even you are partly synthetic"

This doesn't strike me as a play for sympathy, but a warning that the Crucible's blast won't just take out the Reapers.  And even Shepard is at risk, for whatever reason (I assume it's not just because Shepard walked into the explosion like an idiot)

Arguing that Shepard died is pointless, since we know for sure he didn't. Even if he is dying, he still didn't got straight out killed like Reapers or stuff.

Also, Catalyst's warning makes sense under certain conditions, that condition being low EMS. When all technology is destroyed, so are synthetic parts of Shepard. If red wave is properly calibrated, technology is intact.

Shepard isn't synthetic life. You really can't argue that Lazarus project made him like EDI or the Geth.

[The Twilight God]

bas_kon wrote...

I think the thing is not that people can not deduct Shepard lives (which he does, without a doubt), it's that they're angry because they didn't get the reunion scene they wanted.

I agree with this. Without a reunion scene the players doesn't really get anything more than Synthesis or Sontrol Shepard. For all intents and purposes Shepard ends at the docking chamber. However, you have to actually make a major sacrifice in Destroy, but you don't in Synthesis and Control. They might as well just take out the synthetic genocide and kill Shepard in all endings so that they are equal.

Now if Synthesis and Control are indoctrinated endings and the narration in the EC is from the perspective of an indoctrinated character, then Destroy is fine as it is the only ending in which the reapers are actually defeated. In Control the cycle conitnues after a brief pause by a delusion Shepard AI to repair the relays and in Synthesis everyone is enslaved to the Reaper's will. This explains why the endings are brief and narrated by a person stating what they hope will happen, from their perspective, vs what actually DOES happen. If they went into too much exposition it would reveal the indoctrinated nature of those endings and break the players' indoctrination. But since people insist on believeing they aren't indoctrinated and all ending play out at face value, Destroy is seen as objectively inferior to many people.

bas_kon wrote...

Now that they know the LI comes back to Earth, they want more. But even if we saw him being rescued, he could die in the way to Earth, also we could see him recovered and he could die whilst getting out of  the Hospital, or he could be killed by Joker in revenge for EDI's "death"... Some people have too much free time, they should give me some, I know I could use it.

I think you're wrong here. It never says were they are or that they would get back. They take off from that planet, but if they are pushed into another cluster while riding the crucible wave they are still stranded with the relays broken and repair crews havinf the FTL out to them to fix the one closest to them. That could take decades or a century. The fate of the crew is largely unknown in Destroy where in Control and Synthesis all the reapers everywhere can fix them faster cause they are already all over the place. Bioware has admitted that it is put in for "hope's sake". If they are in the Local Cluster and Shepard definitely lives why do you need hope??? The entire point of the high ems destroy teaser is to prevent backlash that Shepard dies in all endings. That's it. They get to kill Shepard off in all endings, but give you some rope so you can headcanon whatever you want. Even that rope is not limited to Destroy. Thing is, you can headcanon Shepard coming back in any ending. Control being the most believable with him making a the cylon avatar body.

bas_kon wrote...

There's also people who hate Destroy for killing sinthetics and want it to be even worse by having shepard dead (no matter if you see him breath or not) so peole won't pick it. And for the record, the last gasp is always breathing out as if loosing conciousness, not breathing in as if waking up...

Personally, I hate the other two as the story dictates that they are indoctrinated endings. Therefore I will never pick them. So Destroy is the only ending that works. I'd love to be able to pick other endings, but none of the other's make any sense. Suiciding myself on the word of the Reapers to advance their agenda (saren) or be part of the Reaper influenced control party (TIM) will never be an option.  

bas_kon wrote...

Edit: Also, I don't think non Reaper tech gets damaged. The brat says just reaper tech and AIs, the Normandy crashes because EDI dies, the rest of the shipt are intact, the citadel has explosions because of the blast same as the relays. Sheoard implants aren't reaper tech. And I think the catalyst says shepard can die because he knows Shepard is unsure if he's a AI himself (cercerus mission) the same way he knows about that stupid kid.

The Normandy lands or crahses regardless of ending.

We don't know what Shepard's implant tech came from. It is more than likely modified husk technology. However, it is said that all synthetics will be "effected". The extent or variations of that "effect" are unknown. 

[The Twilight God]

Funkdrspot wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

Did you see how Legion showed the example of Geth vs Reaper 'intelligence'? Nowhere do you see any reall physical parts. What you see looks like a nerve cell.

What's the precise differences in the brain between an animal that acts on instinct and a self-aware human? 

The question keeps getting dodged.

What is that "intelligence" made of? What exactly is the Crucible destroying when it destroys synthetic life?


There is no difference between humans and other animals other than the level of prehensil dexterity of the hands and complex speech (although that may not be limited to humans).

[danby]

GarrusIsMyBro wrote...

How is Shepard still alive under that rubble? If he fell back to London how would he survive falling through Earth's atmosphere? So is he still alive on the Citadel? If so, why does the rubble look like concrete from Earth? This was my only unanswered question even before the EC.

Its on the citadel.   You see one of the conduits that on it.  Im sure there is concrete like material on the citadel.  You can see damage to it like its concrete.  

[BABYRHINO97]

The Twilight God wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

Did you see how Legion showed the example of Geth vs Reaper 'intelligence'? Nowhere do you see any reall physical parts. What you see looks like a nerve cell.

What's the precise differences in the brain between an animal that acts on instinct and a self-aware human? 

The question keeps getting dodged.

What is that "intelligence" made of? What exactly is the Crucible destroying when it destroys synthetic life?


There is no difference between humans and other animals other than the level of prehensil dexterity of the hands and complex speech (although that may not be limited to humans).

It seems to destroy AI. I know it seems impossible for it to only target AI, but we just can't understand it because is

A: Set far in the future
B: Reaper tech
C: Fictional.

[The Twilight God]

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

Did you see how Legion showed the example of Geth vs Reaper 'intelligence'? Nowhere do you see any reall physical parts. What you see looks like a nerve cell.

What's the precise differences in the brain between an animal that acts on instinct and a self-aware human? 

The question keeps getting dodged.

What is that "intelligence" made of? What exactly is the Crucible destroying when it destroys synthetic life?


There is no difference between humans and other animals other than the level of prehensil dexterity of the hands and complex speech (although that may not be limited to humans).

It seems to destroy AI. I know it seems impossible for it to only target AI, but we just can't understand it because is

A: Set far in the future
B: Reaper tech
C: Fictional.

So basically, what you're saying is it can't be explained and it makes no sense. I agree.

Every discussion on the forum can be handwaved with "it's just fiction".  What fun is that?

[SentinelShepParagon]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Posts like these make me realize that people don't read the news anymore. Real people have lived through explosions, bombings and earthquakes without shields, medigel or super advanced polymer armor.

[Grub Killer8016]

Shepard gets blown up all the time.... and he comes out without a scratch.

[Iakus]

Pitznik wrote...
Arguing that Shepard died is pointless, since we know for sure he didn't. Even if he is dying, he still didn't got straight out killed like Reapers or stuff.

Also, Catalyst's warning makes sense under certain conditions, that condition being low EMS. When all technology is destroyed, so are synthetic parts of Shepard. If red wave is properly calibrated, technology is intact.

Shepard isn't synthetic life. You really can't argue that Lazarus project made him like EDI or the Geth.

Die fast, or die slow, it's still dying.  And Bioware chose not to elaborate on whether or not Shepard is dying.  They left a loose end in an EC that's supposed to provide closure.  Not cool.

The Catalyst's warning comes regardless of EMS.  It's only phrased differently.  That one was the highest EMS warning.

I can't argue what the Lazarus Project made Shepard into because what teh Lazarus Project did exactly was never explained either.  Shepard can in fact speculate at Kronos Base that he/she might simply be a high tech VI that thinks it's Shepard.

[BABYRHINO97]

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

BABYRHINO97 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Some which part of a synthetic is alive and which part is just tech? That's all I'm asking.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. But it seems like the AI is the living part, while the hardware is just a shell to house the software. Only the software was destroyed, not the body.

What is the AI part made of?

Did you see how Legion showed the example of Geth vs Reaper 'intelligence'? Nowhere do you see any reall physical parts. What you see looks like a nerve cell.

What's the precise differences in the brain between an animal that acts on instinct and a self-aware human? 

The question keeps getting dodged.

What is that "intelligence" made of? What exactly is the Crucible destroying when it destroys synthetic life?


There is no difference between humans and other animals other than the level of prehensil dexterity of the hands and complex speech (although that may not be limited to humans).

It seems to destroy AI. I know it seems impossible for it to only target AI, but we just can't understand it because is

A: Set far in the future
B: Reaper tech
C: Fictional.

So basically, what you're saying is it can't be explained and it makes no sense. I agree.

Every discussion on the forum can be handwaved with "it's just fiction".  What fun is that?

No, I'm saying that I can't explain what makes an AI because it doesn't exist. Though, someone a few posts back said that it was its self awareness that made it an AI, which would made sense.

What I can explain, though, is that there is a difference between an AI like EDI and a VI like the ones on the Citadel. The Crucible can tell the difference between them.

[Massa FX]

I'll go with the IT speculators. Shepard doesn't ever make it to the beam. She took a long nap after getting zapped by Harbingers red beam of death.

Its all just head cannon on fans part because Bioware is the only entity that knows and understands the ending.

[bas_kon]

The Twilight God wrote...
I agree with this. Without a reunion scene the players doesn't really get anything more than Synthesis or Sontrol Shepard. For all intents and purposes Shepard ends at the docking chamber. However, you have to actually make a major sacrifice in Destroy, but you don't in Synthesis and Control. They might as well just take out the synthetic genocide and kill Shepard in all endings so that they are equal.

Now if Synthesis and Control are indoctrinated endings and the narration in the EC is from the perspective of an indoctrinated character, then Destroy is fine as it is the only ending in which the reapers are actually defeated. In Control the cycle conitnues after a brief pause by a delusion Shepard AI to repair the relays and in Synthesis everyone is enslaved to the Reaper's will. This explains why the endings are brief and narrated by a person stating what they hope will happen, from their perspective, vs what actually DOES happen. If they went into too much exposition it would reveal the indoctrinated nature of those endings and break the players' indoctrination. But since people insist on believeing they aren't indoctrinated and all ending play out at face value, Destroy is seen as objectively inferior to many people.

I don't know, I just don't think the problem is about the devs wanting Shepard to die in every single ending, even high EMS Destroy.
IMO, the reunion scene didn't happen because of resources, they had to choose between "goodbye scene" and "renunion" and the first won since people who choose other endings would get to see it. And/or they had to choose between memorial and reunion, and the first won again since even though the LI's animations and the contex are different, it's easier to use the enviroment and the non LI NPC positions/animations, than making a brand new scene from scratch and just to show up in destroy with high EMS, since other Destroy endings have the LI put the nameplate on the wall as in Control and Synthesis. And I imagine the breath scene wasn't expanded for the same reasons.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like a reunion as much as the next guy, but I have to be realist. It's a free DLC, they show you as much as they can with the resources they have. Maybe it will be expanded latter on, I don't know. But in any case, I'm a 100% sure shepard survives.

The Twilight God wrote...

I think you're wrong here. It never says were they are or that they
would get back. They take off from that planet, but if they are pushed
into another cluster while riding the crucible wave they are still
stranded with the relays broken and repair crews havinf the FTL out to
them to fix the one closest to them. That could take decades or a
century. The fate of the crew is largely unknown in Destroy where in
Control and Synthesis all the reapers everywhere can fix them
faster cause they are already all over the place. Bioware has admitted
that it is put in for "hope's sake". If they are in the Local Cluster
and Shepard definitely lives why do you need hope??? The entire point of
the high ems destroy teaser is to prevent backlash that Shepard dies in
all endings. That's it. They get to kill Shepard off in all endings,
but give you some rope so you can headcanon whatever you want. Even that
rope is not limited to Destroy. Thing is, you can headcanon Shepard
coming back in any ending. Control being the most believable with him
making a the cylon avatar body.

But that vision is too fatalist, I mean we see every ship going back home, we don't see them arrive, but we can guess they all do because they show you wex and grunt on Tuchanka. The Normandy couldn't be too far from the sol system because the crucible wave took them in no time. What you think is far more stretched than them coming back, totally plausible, but less likely based in the context of the ending (what Hakett says,music, slides, breath scene).

The Twilight God wrote...

Personally, I hate the other two as the story dictates that they are
indoctrinated endings. Therefore I will never pick them. So Destroy is
the only ending that works. I'd love to be able to pick other endings,
but none of the other's make any sense. Suiciding myself on the word of
the Reapers to advance their agenda (saren) or be part of the Reaper
influenced control party (TIM) will never be an option.  

Yeah, I don't really find appealing the other endings either. The less worst option to me is Destroy.

The Twilight God wrote...

The Normandy lands or crahses regardless of ending.

We don't know what Shepard's implant tech came from. It is more than likely modified husk technology. However, it is said that all synthetics will be "effected". The extent or variations of that "effect" are unknown. 

I didn't remember, since I saw it on youtube and wanted to forget about it (especially Synthesis). But yes, you're right.

Although it could perfectly be that every tech shut down as the wave passes as if it was an electromacnetic one, since we see it's not tham much of a deal, except for the relays and the citadel, and even then, we are told a lot of times, it's not that bad. All I know is what I see, I've done all Destroy endings, so when I see the difference of the LI actions + Normandy getting off the planet + breath scene, to me it equals reunion off-screen.
It doesn't matter to me if the devs wanted Shepard to die, because all things implie he didn't, there's not a single thing in the EC scenes of the ending, afaik, that makes you think he died. And since if they make a sequel it would take place centuries in the future, Shepard and his LI, except Liara maybe, will be dead.

[The Twilight God]

bas_kon wrote...

I don't know, I just don't think the problem is about the devs wanting Shepard to die in every single ending, even high EMS Destroy.
 
IMO, the reunion scene didn't happen because of resources, they had to choose between "goodbye scene" and "renunion" and the first won since people who choose other endings would get to see it.

 
Resources? I'm not talking about EC specific additions, but the game itself in general. This should have been in the vanilla game right out of the box (and the EC stuff too). A slideshow mixed into the credits showing post ending Shepard and/or crew or a brief 4 sec scene depicting Shep shopping somewhere with Liara and child, or working on a garden with Tali in their backyard on Rannoch, sipping drinks with Garrus, etc. to replace the stargazer (which I thought was pointless). Instead they left one ending open and incomplete at the end of a trilogy. That's just bad form. And who gets buzz aldrin to come in for that? When I saw his name in the credits I was surprised. They are obsessed with celebrity voice acting.

bas_kon wrote...

But that vision is too fatalist, I mean we see every ship going back home, we don't see them arrive, but we can guess they all do because they show you wex and grunt on Tuchanka. The Normandy couldn't be too far from the sol system because the crucible wave took them in no time. What you think is far more stretched than them coming back, totally plausible, but less likely based in the context of the ending (what Hakett says,music, slides, breath scene).

There is no "too fatalistic" in this scenario. Within the context of the game world's reality/lore it cannot be assumed they will be able to get back. There was no need to destroy the relays. In fact it makes no sense considering the relays only get 1 shot this way but some relays go to multiple regions which means those regions don;t get the Crucible blasts. There should still be Reapers out there. It didn't blow the reapers aparts. The player can headcanon whatever they want, but headcanon is not canon. It could be as easy as having subtitles say "Planet Demeter, Local Cluster." when you first see the leaves and the camera moves to the Normandy. but they didn't do that. The whole crashing on some random world is so pointless. They could have went back to get shepard and then forced to land on Earth before they couldget close enough when the Crucible goes off. This way ALL characters can be at the memorial and people who romanced Miranda or Jack don't ignored yet again. Seriously, wouldn't an earth sunrise be more powerful than some random "who gives a sh*t" planet?

bas_kon wrote...

Although it could perfectly be that every tech shut down as the wave passes as if it was an electromacnetic one, since we see it's not tham much of a deal, except for the relays and the citadel, and even then, we are told a lot of times, it's not that bad. All I know is what I see, I've done all Destroy endings, so when I see the difference of the LI actions + Normandy getting off the planet + breath scene, to me it equals reunion off-screen.

You are welcome to believe that, but it is headcanon. His "implied survival" is implied vs verified (which could have easily been the case) for the sole purpose of throwing you a bone so that you can headcanon. To me it's just there so that if I complained they could say, " b-but the breathe" or "last you saw he was breathing. You can't say he died". Problem is I can and there is alot of evidence to support why Shepard would either die or be comatose.  If synthesis is to be taken as truth (shepard's energy is unique needed for synthesis) he is pretty much dead after a slow death from celular decay and organ failure as significant portion of his bodily mass is fubar.

Sound fatalistic. It is without lore handwaving and wizards.

[Codename_Code]

She cant survive an explosion to the face, is all a dream

Modifié par Codename_Code, 11 août 2012 - 12:22 .

[The Twilight God]

Funkdrspot wrote...




[*]My post then countered how you misinterpreted what the Catalyst said


[*]I show that you have a clear lack of comprehension for what the Catalyst was saying and you're making the elementary school mistake of doing a literal interpretation when it wasn't intended. [/list]

Ah, the genius speaks. An honor indeed that you would deem me worthy of your precious time.

If I may, you never countered anything I said. Why would you? Surely I am beneath your radar. What you did was simply tell me I was incorrect and misinterpreted the Stat Child because... well, because you say so. I understand that with your  heightened intellectual and cognitive abilities you can convey a novel's worth of logical deduction in a few words. But a mere low brow commoner such as I cannot fathom your complex rebuttals, the sofistication and subtlety of which borders on non-existence. Simply amazing.

I'll have to study this closely. And perhaps I'll one day, after several years of intense inrospection, be able to piece together the true brillance of your "counter-argument" : I misinterpreated the Star child, because you say I mistinterpreated the Star Child. Ergo, I am wrong and you are right.

It's so unknowably brilliant. So perfect, it's circular.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 11 août 2012 - 10:04 .